Idea on penalties and sanctions

Forum to discuss everything that is Tigers related

Moderators: Tigerbeat, Tigers Press Office, Rizzo, Tigers Webmaster

DingDong
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 460
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:06 am

Re: Idea on penalties and sanctions

Post by DingDong » Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:46 pm

ourla wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 7:55 pm
Barnes just carded Curry because of "4 straight penalties" - where is that in the laws?
Law 9.10: When different players of the same team repeatedly commit the same offence, the referee gives a general caution to the team and if they then repeat the offence, the referee temporarily suspends the guilty player(s).

In Curry's case they were all when advantage was being played so no warning was possible. You also have to take into account they were in the red zone which elevates the sanction.

DingDong
Bronze Member
Bronze Member
Posts: 460
Joined: Mon Sep 03, 2018 10:06 am

Re: Idea on penalties and sanctions

Post by DingDong » Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:56 pm

ourla wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 5:28 pm
I don't see the relevance of position on the field or if one of the penalties was less clear or obvious than another. It's a sanction as a result of cumulative penalties. Just like Weise got a ban for x number of yellows in a certain time frame.
Take Currys first penalty, great tackle at the kick off by himself only to be forced off his feet by his own incoming player. Imagine that was to be a YC because of an automatic accumulation as you are suggesting, and if he had already been carded that soft penalty (through no fault of his own) would then be a red card, all for a minor technical offence outside the 22, not even foul play.

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3735
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Idea on penalties and sanctions

Post by ourla » Fri Jan 07, 2022 9:29 pm

DingDong wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:46 pm
ourla wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 7:55 pm
Barnes just carded Curry because of "4 straight penalties" - where is that in the laws?
Law 9.10: When different players of the same team repeatedly commit the same offence, the referee gives a general caution to the team and if they then repeat the offence, the referee temporarily suspends the guilty player(s).

In Curry's case they were all when advantage was being played so no warning was possible. You also have to take into account they were in the red zone which elevates the sanction.
Is repeatedly 3, 4, 5 or some other number? Barnes stated 4 but there is no definitive number.

So a caution may or not occur?

Doesn't mention the red zone in the law? Why does it elevate the sanction?
You're either in or you're out

ourla
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3735
Joined: Tue Jun 04, 2013 3:03 pm

Re: Idea on penalties and sanctions

Post by ourla » Fri Jan 07, 2022 9:32 pm

DingDong wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 8:56 pm
ourla wrote:
Fri Jan 07, 2022 5:28 pm
I don't see the relevance of position on the field or if one of the penalties was less clear or obvious than another. It's a sanction as a result of cumulative penalties. Just like Weise got a ban for x number of yellows in a certain time frame.
Take Currys first penalty, great tackle at the kick off by himself only to be forced off his feet by his own incoming player. Imagine that was to be a YC because of an automatic accumulation as you are suggesting, and if he had already been carded that soft penalty (through no fault of his own) would then be a red card, all for a minor technical offence outside the 22, not even foul play.
A penalty is a penalty. Unless they change the laws.
You're either in or you're out

mol2
Super User
Super User
Posts: 3982
Joined: Wed May 02, 2007 5:48 pm
Location: Cosby

Re: Idea on penalties and sanctions

Post by mol2 » Sat Jan 08, 2022 10:53 am

The ref does not need to give a warning for repeated infringements before issuing a yellow. The number is irrelevant. One can be enough - deliberate knock on to kill an attack in the 22 almost always results in a yellow without warning.

The idea that sides could continue to infringe with impunity during an advantage phase if no prior card warning would give teams no reason not to seal off, go offside, pull the maul down or whatever it takes to prevent a try until play comes to an end and a warning is issued is not good.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest